1. On December 20, 201, the Defendant: (a) stated that “The Defendant would pay the last registration fee of the university of Malaysia F, Malaysia, etc. to the victim E (hereinafter “the victim”) within D new location operated by the Defendant, D (51 years, women) around 200,000,000 won, if he/she lent 3 million won to him/her.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the complainant, he did not have the intent or ability to repay it, he received 3 million won from the injured party GFC to the GFC account in the name of the defendant and acquired property profits.

2. On January 29, 2012, the Defendant: “Around January 29, 2012, at the same place as the preceding paragraph, the Defendant agreed that the victim would pay KRW 10 million, including KRW 3 million, every month from February 2012, every five months, if he/she borrowed KRW 7 million as his/her small son H was going to study for the first grade of the university of Malaysia.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, he received 7 million won from the injured party to the GFC account in the name of the defendant, and acquired property benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement corresponding thereto;

1. Application of the witness E’s legal statement statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine (amounting to 2,00,000 won);

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the first offender, the reflector, the full repayment, etc.);